The ReactOS project aims to be an open source Windows NT-compatible operating system which can run Windows applications and utilise Windows drivers. Obviously, this is quite a daunting task, and as such, progress has been relatively slow. As a result, project coordinator and kernel developer Aleksey Bragin has proposed a rather drastic solution.

Linux is a waste of time, people should just improve BSD
BSD is a waste of time, people should just improve Unix
Unix is a waste of time, people should just improve VMS

(Let me guess, you use some flavor of Linux and find developers volunteering there time for non-Linux related projects downright offensive right?)

And, the reasons for a win32 native alternative are probably just as valid today as when they motivated the starting of the ReactOS project. It'd be nice to be able to buy an OS from someone other than Microsoft just because one has to run some win32 app.

Linux is a waste of time, people should just improve BSD
BSD is a waste of time, people should just improve Unix
Unix is a waste of time, people should just improve VMS

(Let me guess, you use some flavor of Linux and find developers volunteering there time for non-Linux related projects downright offensive right?)

No, I am not an extremist like that, I do support other projects other than Linux, I also use BSD, and Windows when I have to. I am open to use whatever software in order to get done with the work, I use the best tool for the job and am neutral when it comes to software.

I really wish the best for ReactOS, and I hope they succeed, I would love to see a free implementation of Windows, and I would love if they work closely with the Wine team, I know having a free implementation of Windows will benefit everyone, I am just saying that they have very big envisions and goals and not enough man power. There is nothing wrong with that, but I'm afraid that if that continues to be the case, by the time they reach to the 1.0 stage, with the current man power they have, it will take a lot of time for them and it will be too late already because Windows will be much more ahead.

I hope I'm wrong though, and I hope they get more man power and succeed with their project.

And, the reasons for a win32 native alternative are probably just as valid today as when they motivated the starting of the ReactOS project. It'd be nice to be able to buy an OS from someone other than Microsoft just because one has to run some win32 app.

I think you are way off the mark here. While you could argue for most things that double effort is wasted effort (to which I wouldn't light-heartedly sign up to re. your examples), all these projects you mentioned have actually produced some quality, usable code.

But with ReactOS, the waste really lies in that it has never gone anywhere - if I am not doing it great unjustice. I feel like having deja-vus for like a decade... everytime ReactOS gets a mention, I get the impression they got like 98% to go still. That's the difference, others may be wasteful, but they are getting somewhere nonetheless. Not that I care - just saying...

I accept I am doing ReactOS injustice if you were to tell me that actually, it will be as complete and usable as, say Ubuntu, within the next 2-3 years. Or else, yes, it is a waste of time that has been going on for a very long time. People can tinker with it, fine... only, maybe there comes the day where ReactOS news items are about as useful as Duke Nukem ones

Nuke'm for ever has yet to produce a playable alpha or beta yet. ReactOS current images are available for install, liveCD and prepackaged VMs.

My grief was really with the minimal thought one-liner suggesting that developers put there time elsewhere because the comment poster feels that the project is not moving ahead fast enough. It's a project I check up on about as frequently as the news articles about it hit the pages but I don't feel the personal justification to demand where developers spend there leisure time. Even if it's only increased the involved developer's understanding of win32 back end, that's a benefit.

It's much like the people who think that "Linux" (ignorantly meaning everything that happens to use the kernel) needs to be consolidated into a single master distribution before it will ever gain desktop retail success. They look at market share as if it somehow indicates more than the quality of one's marketing and sales teams. They assume that any distribution based on the kernel should be focusing on that one person's primary interest of retail measurements. As if the distributions and developers have some obligation owed to that one individual.